28:0085(18)CA - VA Medical Center, Fort Howard, MD and AFGE Local 2146 -- 1987 FLRAdec CA



[ v28 p85 ]
28:0085(18)CA
The decision of the Authority follows:


28 FLRA No. 18

VETERANS ADMINISTRATION MEDICAL CENTER
FORT HOWARD, MARYLAND

              Respondent

        and

AMERICAN FEDERATION OF GOVERNMENT
EMPLOYEES, LOCAL 2146, AFL-CIO

              Charging Party

Case No. 3-CA-70181

DECISION AND ORDER

I. Statement of the Case

This unfair labor practice case is before the Authority in accordance with section 2429.1(a) of the Authority's Rules and Regulations, based on a stipulation of facts by the parties, who have agreed that no material issue of fact exists.

The complaint alleges that the Respondent violated section 7116(a)(1), (5), and (8) of the Federal Service Labor - Management Relations Statute (the Statute) by failing and refusing to provide the American Federation of Government Employees, Local 2146, AFL - CIO (the Charging Party), with the names and home addresses of bargaining unit employees located at the Veterans Administration Medical Center in Fort Howard, Maryland.

II. Facts

The American Federation of Government Employees, Local 2146, AFL - CIO is the exclusive representative of all regular workforce employees of the Veterans Administration, Fort Howard, Maryland with the exception of management officials, supervisors, professional employees and personal service employees engaged in other than purely clerical work. By letter dated November 13, 1986, the Charging Party requested that the Respondent furnish it with a list of home addresses of all unit employees. By letter dated November 19, 1986, the Respondent refused to furnish the Union with the information requested. The parties stipulated that the home [PAGE] addresses of the employees are normally maintained by the Respondent in the regular course of business; are reasonably available; and do not constitute guidance, advice, counsel, or training provided to management officials or supervisors relating to collective bargaining.

III. Positions of the Parties

The Respondent contends that the information is not necessary for the Charging Party "to communicate 'full and proper discussion, understanding and negotiations of subjects within the collective bargaining unit.'" Respondent's Answer to Complaint at 2. The Respondent states that the Authority's decisions concerning this issue are subject to appeals now pending in the Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit. See Defense Mapping Agency Aerospace Center, St. Louis, Missouri, 24 FLRA No. 5 (1986), petition for review filed sub nom. U.S. Department of Defense and Defense Mapping Agency Aerospace Center, St. Louis, Missouri v. FLRA, No. 87-1024 (8th Cir. Jan. 8, 1987); Farmers Home Administration Finance Offi